NORMAN LEE IGO, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Norman Lee Igo appealed the partial denial of his motion for jail credit under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), claiming the trial court awarded him 185 days of jail credit but the Department of Corrections credited him with fewer days. The court affirmed the denial as to two cases but reversed and remanded two other cases due to insufficient documentation supporting the postconviction court's findings.
The court affirmed the postconviction court's orders denying additional jail credit in cases 03-18021 and 04-19531, but reversed and remanded cases 04-20905 and 04-20917 because the postconviction court failed to attach documents supporting its findings and did not conclusively refute Igo's claim that the trial court orally awarded 185 days.
[1] A defendant's claim for jail credit is facially sufficient if the entitlement to relief can be determined from the trial court records and county jail records.
[2] A postconviction court's findings regarding jail credit must be supported by attached portions of the record that conclusively refute the defendant's claims.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“defendant presented a facially sufficient claim by alleging that the claim could be determined from the trial court records and the county jail records”
Establishes the standard for evaluating jail credit claims based on documentary evidence
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIgo alleged he spent time in county jail from October 5, 2004, to April 7, 2005, and claimed the trial court orally awarded him 185 days' jail credit …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Jail Credit Calculation cases and more on FLexlaw
LaROSE, Judge.
Norman Lee Igo appeals the partial denial of his motion for jail credit filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We affirm the postconviction court’s order as to circuit court cases 03-18021 and 04-19531; we reverse and remand for further proceedings as to circuit court cases 04-20905 and 04-20917.
In his motion, Mr. Igo alleged that the trial court awarded him 185 days’ jail credit in cases 04-20905 and 04-20917 for time spent in county jail from October 5, 2004, to April 7, 2005. Allegedly, however, the Department of Corrections (DOC) is crediting him with only 141 days’ jail credit in case 04-20905 and 153 days’ jail credit in case 04-20917. Mr. Igo claims entitlement to additional jail credit. He also claims that the court records on their face demonstrate his entitlement to relief. See Whitt v. State, 807 So. 2d 788, 788 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (finding that defendant presented a facially sufficient claim by alleging that the claim could be determined from the trial court records and the county jail records).
With respect to case 04-20905, the post-conviction court concluded that Mr. Igo was in county jail from November 15, 2004, to April 7, 2005, and, therefore, entitled to 144 days’ credit. Further, the postconviction court concluded that, because the judgment and sentence reflected that he only received 141 days’ jail credit in case 04-20905, Mr. Igo was entitled to an additional 3 days’ credit. Similarly, in case 04-20917, because the postconviction court concluded that Mr. Igo was in county jail from November 5, 2004, to April 7, 2005, he was entitled to 154 days’ credit. The judgment and sentence reflected that Mr. Igo received only 153 days’ jail credit in case 04-20917. Consequently, the post-conviction court granted Mr. Igo one additional day of jail credit in case 04-20917.
The postconviction court’s order refers to criminal report affidavits, judgments and sentences, and a general surety appearance bond to support its finding that Mr. Igo was in county jail from November 15, 2004, to April 7, 2005, in case 04-20905 and from November 5, 2004, to April 7, 2005, in case 04-20917. Unfortunately, the postconviction court did not attach to its order any criminal report affidavits or general surety appearance bonds for these two cases. Consequently, the documents attached to the postconviction court’s order do not support its findings. Moreover, the postconviction court failed to refute conclusively Mr. Igo’s claim that the trial court orally awarded him 185 days’ jail credit in each case.
Accordingly, we reverse with directions for the postconviction court to reconsider Mr. Igo’s claims for additional jail credit in cases 04-20905 and 04-20917. See Bailey v. State, 925 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). If the postconviction court, again, denies relief, it shall attach to its order those portions of the record that conclusively refute Mr. Igo’s claims. Id.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
STRINGER and SILBERMAN, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Munn v. State, 981 So. 2d 1262 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)…rt and remand to the postconvietion court to credit Mr. Munn with an additional three days for time spent in Hamilton County and Suwanee County jails on November 13-18, 2005; March 30 to April 17, 2007; and June 22 to July 3, 2007. See Igo v. State, 930 So. 2d 856 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). In all other respects, we affirm the postconvietion court’s order without prejudice to any right Mr. Munn may have to file a timely and facially sufficient motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 addressing the volu…
Authorities Cited
- Whitt v. State, 807 So. 2d 788 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)
- Ulysses Bailey v. State, 925 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)